AMD FirePro W4190M vs AMD Radeon R7 240 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two AMD GCN 1.0 parts, but the wins are not distributed evenly. The AMD Radeon R7 240 takes the sole recorded head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 5063 against the FirePro W4190M's 4505. That is a 12.4% advantage, and it places the R7 240 in a higher overall performance percentile: 30th among all GPUs versus 26th for the FirePro.

The use-case split favors the desktop part in raw compute throughput. The R7 240's advantage is rooted in its higher shading unit count relative to its clock speed profile, but the FirePro W4190M is not without its own strengths. The FirePro's higher base and boost clocks (825 MHz and 900 MHz, respectively, versus 730 MHz and 780 MHz for the R7 240) give it a clock-for-clock efficiency edge in the same 28 nm process node. However, that clock advantage does not translate into a benchmark win. The data shows a single-test dataset, so the FirePro's case rests on architectural traits rather than recorded victories.

For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, the FirePro W4190M is the clear theoretical winner. Its GDDR5 memory at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) delivers 64.00 GB/s across a 128-bit bus, more than double the R7 240's 28.80 GB/s from DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). That bandwidth advantage is critical for texture-heavy or large-dataset OpenCL workloads, even if the single Geekbench OpenCL score does not reflect it.

The R7 240, in contrast, wins on pixel and texture throughput per clock in the recorded data. Its 6.240 GPixel/s pixel rate and 15.60 GTexel/s texture rate are lower than the FirePro's 7.200 GPixel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s, but the R7 240 still posts the higher overall score. This suggests the R7 240's 320 shading units are better utilized in the OpenCL test than the FirePro's 384 shading units, possibly due to driver maturity or memory subsystem behavior.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental architecture: GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The transistor density is identical at 12.3M per mm². The differences lie in the chip implementation and memory subsystem.

The R7 240 uses the Oland chip, while the FirePro W4190M uses the Opal chip. Both are GCN 1.0, but the FirePro Mobile generation (Wx100M) is built for portable devices, as indicated by its MXM Module slot width and "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs. The R7 240 is a desktop card with a single-slot form factor, 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and fixed display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA).

Compute resources differ. The R7 240 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro W4190M has more of everything: 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is a 20% increase in shading units and TMUs for the FirePro, but the R7 240 still wins the benchmark. The FirePro's clocks are higher (825 MHz base, 900 MHz boost versus 730 MHz base, 780 MHz boost), which should theoretically compensate, but the data shows otherwise.

Memory is the biggest architectural divergence. The R7 240 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 28.80 GB/s. The FirePro uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s. The GDDR5 interface is a substantial upgrade in bandwidth, but it does not help the FirePro in the recorded OpenCL score.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The R7 240 has a 30 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 200 W; the FirePro has no recorded TDP or PSU requirement. The R7 240 uses no power connectors, as does the FirePro.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The R7 240 scores 5063, the FirePro W4190M scores 4505. The delta is 12.4% in favor of the R7 240. This is the sole recorded win for the R7 240, and the FirePro has zero wins.

The R7 240's nearest rivals in the database are telling. Its score of 5063 exactly ties the AMD Radeon R7 M340 (5063, 0% delta). It is 0.6% ahead of the AMD FirePro W4170M (5034), 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5018), and 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998). These are all close scores, indicating the R7 240 sits at the top of a tight cluster of entry-level GPUs.

The FirePro W4190M's nearest rivals show a different picture. Its 4505 score is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (4499), but it trails the Intel HD Graphics P530 by 1.2% (4560), the AMD Radeon RX 560 by 1.4% (4569), and the AMD Radeon R5 M230 by 1.6% (4577). The FirePro is at the bottom of its comparison group, while the R7 240 is at the top of its group.

The 12.4% delta between the two is significant given how close their nearest rivals are to each other. The R7 240's score is 558 points higher than the FirePro's, a gap that is larger than the difference between any of the R7 240's top two rivals (which are tied) and larger than the FirePro's gap to its nearest rival (6 points). In practical terms, the R7 240 delivers a level of OpenCL compute performance that the FirePro cannot match, despite the FirePro's higher clock speeds and greater shading unit count.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the recorded benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5063, compared to the AMD FirePro W4190M's 4505. The delta is 12.4%.

Q: Does the FirePro W4190M have any benchmark wins over the R7 240?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the FirePro W4190M. The R7 240 holds all recorded head-to-head wins (1 win total).

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The R7 240 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W4190M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus but with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, more than double.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The FirePro W4190M has 384 shading units, while the R7 240 has 320. The FirePro also has 24 TMUs versus the R7 240's 20, and both have 8 ROPs.

Q: What is the clock speed difference?

A: The R7 240 runs at 730 MHz base and 780 MHz boost. The FirePro W4190M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, which is higher in both cases.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specification fields, while sharing the same process node, transistor count, and die size.

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 240 | AMD FirePro W4190M |

|---------------|-------------------|---------------------|

| Chip | Oland | Opal |

| Generation | Volcanic Islands (R7 200) | FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 950 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Base Clock | 730 MHz | 825 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 780 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 384 |

| TMUs | 20 | 24 |

| ROPs | 8 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 6.240 GPixel/s | 7.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 15.60 GTexel/s | 21.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 499.2 GFLOPS | 691.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 30 W | Not recorded |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 200 W | Not recorded |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA | Portable Device Dependent |

| Length | 168 mm (6.6 inches) | Not recorded |

| Height | 69 mm (2.7 inches) | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2013-10-07 | 2015-11-11 |

| Predecessor | Sea Islands | FirePro Mobility |

| Successor | Pirate Islands | Radeon Pro Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | 69 USD | Not recorded |

The R7 240 is a desktop card with a fixed 168 mm length and 69 mm height, while the FirePro is an MXM module with no recorded dimensions. The R7 240 has a 30 W TDP and a 200 W suggested PSU, while the FirePro has neither recorded. The R7 240 launched in October 2013 with a 69 USD launch MSRP; the FirePro launched in November 2015 with no recorded MSRP. Both are end-of-life products. The R7 240's FP32 throughput is 499.2 GFLOPS, while the FirePro's is 691.2 GFLOPS, a 38% advantage for the FirePro that does not translate to the benchmark score.